About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 6
MSNBC 5
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
hill correspondent kelly o'donnell. you're watching it all from up there. what do we know? harry reid was on the floor today talking about it. we know that he needs five republicans to break, and there is a distinction between those who might be willing to vote for cloture to break the filibuster, but would still plan to vote against him when he would only at that point need just 50 to be confirmed, 51 to be confirmed. >> there is a lot of drama in this, andrea, and it gets complicated. it does come down to that. there are many more republicans that would beotology in the first step support ending the debate, taking the actual vote and then voting against hagel because everyone knows he already has publicly enough votes to be confirmed. we're in this period now where the drama is unfolding over a couple of key things. a group of republicans want information on two subjects. part of that coming from hagel related to past speeches, financial details, that they feel they did not get enough of during his confirmation process and the hearing where many people even his supporters say he did
." do you remember when the top democrat in the senate, harry reid, declared just a few weeks ago the democrats would not change the rules in the senate? remember that? wouldn't change the rules to stop senate republicans from abusing the process there. harry reid decided he would just instead make a handshake deal with the republicans' top senator, mitch mcconnell. he said he was satisfied with the republicans just agreeing to be more reasonable on issues like this. remember? they wouldn't change the filibuster rules. they would just agree as gentlemen that the republicans would curtail the excesses of filibustering everything and effectively ruling from the minority. democrats decided to not change the rules on the filibuster and just make that agreement with the republicans instead. they said, you know, at a minimum this will at least improve the confirmation process for the administration's nominees. how is that working out now? just a couple of weeks later. how's that gentleman's agreement going? now that we've just had a filibuster of a cabinet nominee for the first time in
you think you should be going after harry reid as well? >> well, listen. i think harry reid has been clear that he will bring this for a vote. there's a bipartisan group of members of congress working on this issue, in particular universal background checks. and i don't think that democrats are the issue here. there are a number of republicans including self-proclaimed moderates who have yet to commit to support something that has the support of 90% of americans. columbine may not have happened if we had universal background checks. those guns were purchased at a gun show without checks. this won't solve every issue but it'll go a long way in terms of addressing the problem. >> great to see you. >>> i want to bring in our friday political power panel. gang, it's great to have you all here. let's dive into sequestration because it's just so fun. david brooks' article in the "new york times" saying the president hasn't come up with a proposal to avert sequestration let alone one that is politically plausible. peggy noonan in "the wall street journal" is saying it's always cliff ceiling
for growth. then there's washington versus nonwashington split. the example cited first by harry reid, with the governor arguing that the government should focus less on washington's budget battle and more on what's happening in the states. mark, i think you guys do an excellent job outlining the examples here. so the question is do you -- >> it actually remains to be seen. this is what happens to a party that is out of power, out of the white house. we saw the democrats grapple with this after john kerry lost in 2004. so 2005-2006 was all a battle of ideas, how do you position the party for success and the lessons and the fights in the republican party has now either help it going ahead to 2016 or actually could keep it where it currently is right now. but to answer your question, we're really not going to know for another year or two, this is just the beginning of those types of fights. >> congresswoman marsha blackburn was on with chuck todd this morning and he asked her, is the gop problem a message or messenger problem, here's what she said? >> i think it's a little bit of beth i
. how d special report? how are you doing. >> reporter: good morning, bill. bill: harry reid is talking about this potentially on the floor of the senate. if there is news we'll bring it to our viewers. graham says the debate is not over, it has not been serious. what gives? >> reporter: a couple of things, one is confirmation hearings matter. this was not a good showing for chuck hagel in this confirmation hearing and despite the fact that you have other controversial cabinet nominees who have potentially bumpy confirmation hearings hagel's did not go well, and even folks on the democratic side will acknowledge that, and that has made it even more difficult. then you have the additional problem, from his supporters' point of view, that there are calls for speeches that did not come out for the committee that hagel gave and they never received, and now you have one speech, for example, that a group says that they can get to the committee by friday. its already out of committee, but -- so now it's on the house floor. this vote happens, they need 60 votes. democrats have a 55-45 vote marg
with the sequester idea. in fact he has the exact time and date when they first pitched it to senator harry reid, july 27th, 2011. what's your read on that? >> very detailed reporting by bob woodward there. it's an interesting take. certainly the republicans have jumped on. it's been a debate over the last few weeks about who -- actual lit last few months about whose idea this was. you have jack lew, the former chief of staff to the president, up for treasury secretary who said it at a hearing. this was a republican idea. you see the president has sort of hinted at that, too. more recently jay carney at the white house has acknowledged this isn't a white house idea. the republicans are making a big issue of that. as much as the white house is fanning the flames of concern now, sounding the alarms this week it was their idea. they're saying the president needs to come and meet us and sort of acknowledge we gave a little bit on the fiscal cliff on taxes and not going to do it this time. that's the strategy the republicans are using to pin it on the white house. >> joann, they're really blaming the
harry reid, eric cantor there. and members of congress. these are coveted seats. just saying before the president was introduced here, there has been all this advanced notice that the president will be sort of keeping with his confident, even arguably aggressive tone that he has taken since his reelection. the quote that stood out for me from politico this week, it was assigned to a person close to the drafting of the speech. >> right. >> said the president's approach to the republican party in this speech would be borrowed from the 2500-year-old chinese book philosophy "the art of war." and the quote was "build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across." . >> i like the quote. and i think that would be probably a good strategy for the president. i mean, i would hope that we don't see a lot of partisan bickering, but i hope he is aggressive in terms of the proposals that he is going to lay out. this being his last term, most people say 18 months and then you start looking lame duck. so very important speech as to what his presidency and his legacy is going to mean. and i think
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)